Samuel Romilly, it is credibly reported, netted £15,000 annually from his professional avocations. There are other counsel who, probably, make ten or twelve thousand a-year; others, a half, a third, a fourth, or twentieth part of that sum; and others, again, who make nothing. Sir James Scarlett has received as much as £400 with a brief on the northern circuit; and Sir E. Sugden, we believe, received £3000 with his brief, in the case of Small v. Atwood. In the incomes of attorneys are great diversities. Some few, in London, make ten or eleven thousand pounds a-year; a great many more about three or four thousand pounds; and some obscure practitioners do not clear more than £100 a-year. Their clerks experience similar variety of fortune. Some are starving on a paltry £50; others living comfortably on £200; and others sumptuously on a £500 salary. The emoluments and salaries of the masters, registrars, and clerks in Chancery; of the judges in the Admiralty, and ecclesiastical courts, and of the law-officers of the Crown, have been more than doubled since the commencement of the revolutionary war. In 1792 the salary of the chief justice of the King's Bench was £4,000; of the Common Pleas £3,500; of the chief baron of the Exchequer, £3,500; all these have been respectively augmented to £10,000, £8,000, and £7,000 per annum; and the salaries of the puisne judges and barons of the three superior courts have been raised from £2,400 to £5,500 per annum each.* All the judges have patronage-that of the chief justice very valuable; they have, also, some fees remaining, though the principal portion has been commuted. It has been related of these exalted personages, that, at the time sixteen journeymen boot-closers were committed to Newgate for a conspiracy to raise their wages, they were sitting in their chambers in Serjeant's Inn conspiring to raise their own salaries, in consequence of the rise of the necessaries of life. This anecdote reminds us of the fable of the Wolf and the Shepherd. A wolf, says Plutarch, happening to put his head into a hut, where some shepherds were regaling on a leg of mutton, exclaimed-Ah! what a clamour you would have raised had you caught me at such a banquet! The demeanour of the sages of the law would be something similar; they would declaim eloquently on the evils of conspiring when committed by workmen, though it might be done by themselves with impunity. An important fact connected with legalists is, the enormous increase in their number within the last ten years. In 1820 we were engaged in an inquiry similar to the present; and we find, in the interval, the number of attorneys in the metropolis has augmented fifty per cent. There has, no doubt, been a corresponding increase in the country, and in other branches of the profession; and far exceeds the contemporary increment in property and population. It arises, we presume, from the increasing number and perplexities of the laws, which have rendered additional guides, commentators, expounders, and interpreters indispensable; or, it may have arisen from the large fortunes suddenly amassed * Parliamentary Paper, No. 532, Session 1830. by dealers in legal subtleties, which have tempted more than a fair proportion of the community to embark in so lucrative a calling. Whatever may be the cause, it is not creditable to our judicial administration; nor is it a flattering symptom of social happiness and improvement. The increase of litigation, and, consequently, of profit to the profession, is demonstrated by the increase of business in the superior courts, as is shown by the following statement of the number of causes entered for trial: The vast number of bankruptcies and insolvencies of late years must have tended enormously to the emolument of the legal profession, and have rendered them the richest class in the community. The number of persons who took the benefit of the Insolvent Act, amounted in 1820, to 2482; in 1825, to 3665; and in 1830, to 4379.* The number of bankrupts, in 1814, was 1612; in 1820, 1381; in 1826, 2582; in 1829, 1654.† All these breakings up yield an abundant harvest of spoil to the gentlemen of the long robe. In most bankruptcies the solicitors, the bar, the commissioners, the accountants, and auctioneers divide the assets. Very few estates pay any thing worth a man's while going after. Under the late administration of the bankrupt-laws, a man had nothing to do but to get into credit to as large an amount as possible-buy goods in every place-turn merchant-ship off such goods to every quarter of the world-fly kites in every possible way-keep no books, or those so confusedly that no man, called in by the name of an accountant, could make head or tail of them-carry this system of buying, and exporting, and kite-flying to its utmost extent-purchase goods on credit at any price, and for the greatest length of time-declare his insolvency-go into the Gazette; the solicitors, the bar, the commissioners, the accountants, and the auctioneers would set to work; the larger the amount of the man's debts so much the better for the legal, accounting, and auctioneering agents. In such case, the professional men called it a good fat bankruptcy: and, if they could get it into chancery, so much the better; and, in general, it was contrived that a good fat bankruptcy should get into chancery. The result, in general was-ten or twelve years' meetings of commissioners, actions, bills in chancery; and at length, when the legalists had absorbed the estate, they tired, and the creditors were told, Here, gentlemen, are the accounts!" 64 a Mr. Montague justly characterised a commission of bankruptcy tribunal in which the minimum of justice was administered at the maximum of expense." All the commissioners were either very old or * Parliamentary Paper, No. 141, Session 1831. very young men, whose only pretensions were the friendship of the chancellor, or the friendship of some friend of the chancellor, or others connected with the government. They were all either counsel or solicitors, whose sole object was to gain as much money in as little time as possible. Some of them understood the art of accomplishing this so well as to have been known to boast of pocketing thirty guineas a day. These, however, were only ignoble quarry, compared with the great fee-gatherer himself. It appears, from a parliamentary return, that the several sums sacked by the purse-bearer to the lord chancellor, in the year ending 30th April, 1830, amounted to £4081.* In the same year, the sealing of 4861 writs, at 3s. 3d. each, produced £789, which was shared between his lordship, chaff-wax, sealer, and porter. From returns in the same year, the masters in chancery appear to net £4000 per annum, their chief clerk upwards of £1000, and the copying clerk £500 and more. Mr. Wellesley, in a book lately published by him, on the court of chancery, states that the litigation into which he had been forced had cost him £20,000 in four years, and a sum of equal amount had been paid out of the estates of his children. Mr. Davies, the late tea-dealer, of Philpot-lane, was put to an expense of £32,000 by a chancery commission, appointed to ascertain whether he was in a sound state of mind. Sir E. Sugden stated, not long since, that the equity proceedings, under the will of Mr. Thelluson, had been as productive to lawyers as many principalities to their sovereigns. The cause of Small v. Attwood, it is calculated, will swamp £100,000 in law expenses. But we must return to the subject from which we have digressed. The fraud, impoverishment, and desolation resulting from the administration of the Debtor-Laws are almost incredible. In the processes issued against the person, lawyers and attorneys are the parties who chiefly profit. From returns of affidavits of debts, it appears, in two years and a half, 70,000 persons were arrested in and about London, the law-expenses of which could not be less than half a million.† In the year 1827, in the metropolis and two adjoining counties, 23,515 warrants to arrest were granted, and 11,317 bailable processes executed.‡ Thus were eleven thousand persons deprived of their liberty on the mere declarations of others, before any trial or proof that they owed a farthing! So gainful is the trade to attorneys, that they frequently buy up small bills for the purpose of suing the endorsers, and bring nine or ten actions on each. One house alone has brought five hundred actions in this way, and most of them for sums under £20. The sum on which arrest is allowed has been gradually augmented to £20; but this is too small, and the consequence is, the prisons are crowded with debtors for the most paltry amounts. The number of persons committed to the five principal prisons of the metropolis, exclusive of crown debtors, and those imprisoned for contempt, averages 5000 * Parliamentary Paper, No. 626, Session 1830. + Mr. Hume, House of Commons, February 19, 1827. per annum. Of these more than one-third are for sums under £20. In the years 1826-27, the Court of Requests for the city of London imprisoned 753 persons for various terms, from twenty to one hundred days, for sums under £5. In the same year, the Court of Requests for Southwark ordered 9758 executions, and 1893 persons were actually imprisoned for debts amounting only to £16,442.* From 1823 to 1831 the Southwark Request Court committed to the Borough compter and county gaol 8096 persons; of these 3139 were for debts not exceeding twenty shillings.t The minor tribunals for facilitating the recovery of small debts we do not think entitled to the praise usually awarded them. They foment domestic animosities, promote law-suits, and encourage a trumpery system of credit, which is ultimately ruinous both to the retail tradesman and his customers. Neither are they so economical a resource as is generally imagined; the costs of proceedings in them usually amounting to a tax of twenty-five per cent. payable either by creditor or debtor. A debt can seldom be recovered in the Marshalsea or Palace Court for less than £8, even if no resistance is offered. In the several courts of request for the city of London, Middlesex, Westminster, and the Borough, the expenses of recovering a debt of 40s. or under, is at least 11s.; above that sum, twice as much. Such a system can be no advantage to trade; it only tends to fill the coffers of attorneys and clerks of courts, by the ruin of the industrious classes. Only think of the fees received in the request court of Southwark amounting, in one year, to £4255, of which £2475 arose from debts of 40s. or under. In four years, the fees received, in the request court of the City, amounted to £7322.§ Our legal institutions are chiefly beneficial to those under whose auspices their rules and modes of procedure have been framed and regulated. Hence the circuity and expense of law-suits. No prudent man ever thinks it for his interest to sue for a debt below £15; the costs in prosecuting for a small debt being equal to a large one, owing to the proceedings being the same, and the pleadings as voluminous for the recovery of a few shillings as £100. In the King's Bench, the expenses of recovering a debt under £5, even if no defence is made, and judgment goes by default, are not less than £15; if defendant appear, and, as is not uncommonly the case, puts in a dilatory plea, they are increased to £20; and, by taking out a writ of error, they are still further augmented. The following receipt has been often given to debtors, who wish to be troublesome, and to weary out their creditors by an expensive process: When arrested and held to bail, and after being served with a decla * Parliamentary Paper, No. 487, Session 1828. + Parliamentary Paper, No. 240, Session 1831. Treatise on the Police and Crimes of the Metropolis, by the Editor of the Cabinet Lawyer, where the tendency of the debtor-laws is more fully investigated. § Report on Small Debts, Parliamentary Paper, vol. iv. Session 1823. ration, you may plead the general issue, which puts you on for trial sooner than any other plea; but, if you wish to vex your plaintiff, and put him about, put in a special plea; if you are in custody, order your attorney to plead in person, this will cost you £1:1, and run your plaintiff to £30 expense. If you do not intend to try the cause, you have no occasion to do any thing more till the plaintiff gets judgment against you, which he must do the term after you have put in a special plea. The plaintiff is obliged to send you a paper book, which you must return to his attorney with 7s 6d. otherwise you will not put him to more than half the expense. When he proceeds and gets judgment against you, then order your attorney to search the Final Judgment Office, in the Temple; when searched, and found they have got final judgment signed against you, then give plaintiff's attorney notice for him and your attorney to be present with the master at the time the plaintiff taxes the costs; at which time your attorney must have a writ of error with him to give to the plaintiff's attorney before the master, at the time the master taxes the costs; it will put the plaintiff to great expense, which he will have to pay, or go the ground over again. The writ of error will cost you £4: 4 by a London attorney; but, if you wish to be more troublesome, make the writ returnable in parliament, which will cost you £1 : 1 more, and your plaintiff £100. If he has the courage to follow you further, you may then file a bill in Chancery or Exchequer; if he does not then give his answer, your bill will get an injunction against him: you may then get an attachment from the court where your bill was filed, and take his body for contempt of court. The costs incurred by plaintiff and defendant, respectively, will then be as follow: This is a fine exemplification of law, and shows how much greater are the advantages offered to finesse and knavery than to integrity and plain dealing. Some restraints are laid on frivolous writs of error by 6 Geo. IV. c. 96, but in other respects the above outline is a substantially correct exposition of the legal resources available to the unprincipled debtor for harassing his creditor. SUMMARY OF LEGAL ABUSES AND DEFECTS. In the preceding exposition our principal objects have been to give a |